Re: A critique of the BBC aquatic ape programme and the transcript.

Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> "Lee Olsen" <paleocity@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1126187933.266270.191370@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> > "Lee Olsen" <paleocity@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:1126125691.917416.158110@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> > > "Lee Olsen" <paleocity@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > > news:1126025948.306695.235720@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> > > > "Lee Olsen" <paleocity@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > > > news:1125899848.035654.30450@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >
> > > > > Marc thought Dennell's was a learned paper also (it was), and he
> cited
> > > it
> > > > many times claiming it was some big coup for his argument. Turned out
> > > after
> > > > a closer look the truth was just the opposite of his claims.
> > > >
> > > > No, no: although Dennell like many PAs is biased by his savanna
> belief,
> > > it's
> > > > striking how many times he mentions water-related habitats. Robin
> > Dennell
> > > > 2003 "Dispersal & colonisation, long & short chronologies: how
> > continuous
> > > is
> > > > the Early Pleistocene record for hominids outside East Africa?" JHE
> > > > 45:421-440,
> > >
> > >
> > > Marc now back-pedals away from "always by lakes and seas" to "water
> > > related."
> > > Having trouble remembering just what you said or did you just
> > > deliberately misquote Dennell?
> > >
> > > Misquote?? see:
> > >
> > >
> > > eg, "... Although well-adapted to grasslands, it appears to have
> > > > preferred mosaic environments that also contained permanent water &
> some
> > > > wood- or scrubland, & as grasslands. .. Ain Hanech 36°N .. in a
> > > > flood-plain; grassland is indicated by remains of Equus & gazelle,
> open
> > > > water by Hippopotamus.
> >
> > See-----
> > Message-ID: 42cec844$0$6536$ba620e4c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Marc said in this and numerous other posts: "1.8-Ma Homo remains come
> > from Algeria, Iran, Kenya, Georgia, Java... always
> > near lakes or seas (R.Dennell 2003 JHE 45:421)."
> >
> > This was wrong, and as soon as I pointed that out, you moved the goal
> > posts.
> >
> > Again: not one clearly away from water:
>
> However, clearly away from water deep enough to swim and dive in, which
> falsifies a "lakeside" lifestyle.
>
> That's what you believe, but you simply don't know.


No, that's just one more example of your ignorance. Depth of water is
very easy for geologists to find. Here is an example that will even be
clear to you.
http://tinyurl.com/9n5na


The comparative data sya
> otherwise.


The comparative data is nothing more than irrelevant trivia that proves
nothing. Virtually every example you give either has other, better,
explanations or is just false.


>
>
>
> the anatomical & physiol.evidence,
> > which you "forget".
>
>
> You mean the evidence that savanna adapted Homo can out run a horse and
> live in the Sahara Desert?

Yes.

>
> Don't talk such nonsense: some humans can run marathons,


Let's see now, Marc can't catch anything when he runs so humans are all
poor runners. Marc can't dive 10 meters, but human are good divers.
Apparently logic isn't one of your strong aptitudes.


but it's ridiculous
> to believe that H.erectus did: they were much heavier than we, had shorter
> tibiae, longer femoral necks etc.

"That this or that fossil (when alive) did or did not" run "doesn't
contradict that."



We know that at least some H.erectus
> dived a lot: they had ear exostoses.

Thought you said the fossils don't mean anything? Try to be consistent.




Also, the dense bones of H.erectus can
> only reasonably be explained by frequent diving (H.e. or their immediate
> ancestors), exactly (although to a lesser degree) as in all other
> thick-boned mammals: the usual PA "explanations" are just-so fabrications &
> too ridiculous to mention (bee brood eating, carnivor liver consumption,
> head banging & such nonsense).

But try to be relevant



H.erectus could easily have walked along
> rivers & beaches, even run for short distances, why not,


http://tinyurl.com/7u5wo

"In fact, he walked and ran with better mechanics than we do today. The

mechanics of his femur, femur head, pelvis, and lower back are superior

to those of today. We have had to sacrifice some of that efficiency of
walking and running to give birth to children with larger brains."

"The skeleton on the left and closeup view of the femur and pevlis
articulation. The femur head is longer than that of today making for a
better mechanics for bipedal movement. The femur is thicker than ours
adding support."




but no doubt they
> spent a lot of time in water,

No doubt they didn't.



colelcting aquatic plants, diving for
> shellfish,


Lots of imagination, I'll give you credit for that. Do you ever have
anything for evidence?


catching drowned wildebeest, whatever.
>
> But no doubt you believe they got to Flores running over your savanna....



But no doubt you believe they swam from Africa to Flores....


>
>
> > .. moister than today,
>
> Not enough moisture difference to remove the Sahara Desert, didn't you
> read Dennell?
>
> Man, that there was desert, does that mean they lived in thedesert??

Well, if they didn't live there, they probably ran all the way back to
the savanna at night.


A bit
> serious please.

Try it yourself sometime.




>
>
>
>
> > > Of course, almost always were the cheetahs are found, they utilize
> > > scrublands, grasslands etc. occasionally also. Of course, early Homo
> > > could get right out into the Sahara Desert with gazelles, thus leaving
> > > the open-water hippos, fish and turtles far behind. This proves Homo
> > > not descended from Indian Ocean divers.
> > >
> > > Nonsense: you have to prove that there was no water.
> >
> >
> > Nonsense: you have to prove "always
> > near lakes or seas." And I never said there was NO water, just not
> > enough to swim and dive in. Hay 2001 and Clark 1992 took care of that.
> >
> > 1) Already admitting water.
>
> Already admitting water not deep enough to dive in?
>
>
> Sigh. You'll nezver get it. My hypothesis is that our ancestors once dived
> parttime for food. Okidoki?


Too bad you don't have one iota of evidence to back up your claim.



That this or that fossil (when alive) did or did
> not dive doesn't contradict that.


Who needs need fossils to falsify your hypothesis. The tools do not
congregate around large bodies of water, quite the opposite, small
runnels are the norm. These are much to shallow to swim and dive in.
Deeper waters are proven to be hazardous for humans, since they are
such poor swimmers and crocs are 5X faster in the water. We are very
poor swimmers and divers.



>
>
>
> Now prove there was no "large" water.


The geologists already have, try reading the citations.



>
> Even if a lake were nearby, it wouldn't change the fact
> that the sites are alongside the small runnels, so they are still
> NEARER the small (no swimming) bodies of water than lakeside. Ever see
> anyone dive in 50 cm of water? :-)
>
>
> See above. Try to be relevant.

Since your above is irrelevant, see my answer above.


>
>
> R. L. Hay and Kyser, T. K., 2003
> Chemical sedimentology and paleoenvironmental history of Lake
> Odduvai, a Pliocene lake in northern Tanzania. Geological Society of
> America Bulletin: Vol. 113, No. 12, pp. 1505-1521.
> (PS: Marc, you have read this paper have you not?)
>
> I haven't read it. If you think there's something in it that contradicts my
> scenario, let me know.

Try *no lakes* when sites were occupied for a start.


>
>
> > 2) Whatever: we have the anat.& Physiol.evidence.

>
>
> And we have Homo that can outrun a horse and live in the Sahara Desert
> during the Plio/Pleistocene. Not much of an advertisement
> for an aquatic past is it?
>
> Some humans (carrying water usu.)

Prove H. erectus couldn't carry water.

can outrun a horse (how many??), but it's
> ridiculous to think that a heavy animal with long +-horizontal femoral neck
> like H.erectus could do that.

Excuse Me?
http://tinyurl.com/7u5wo
"In fact, he walked and ran with better mechanics than we do today. The

mechanics of his femur, femur head, pelvis, and lower back are superior

to those of today. We have had to sacrifice some of that efficiency of
walking and running to give birth to children with larger brains."
"The skeleton on the left and closeup view of the femur and pevlis
articulation. The femur head is longer than that of today making for a
better mechanics for bipedal movement. The femur is thicker than ours
adding support."


You seem to believe that erectus was identical
> to sapiens.


Cite where I said that and don't leave out the attribution marks.


They were different, eg, heavier & slower, IOW, our ancestors
> are recently developing faster running speeds.

It is not about faster, it's about the hare and the tortoise, ant the
tortoise wins.



>
>
>
> > > The physiological & anatomical data are clear enough.
> >
> >
> > Sure, like fat humans can't outrun a race horse.
> >
> > Exactly. One has to be a real fool if one believed humans regularly
> outrun
> > horses.
>
> One has to be a bigger fool to think humans regularly dive to ten
> meters.
>
> Never heard of Ama??

Ever hear of the Boston Marathon?



>
>
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Etc. Rest repetitions. Better things to do. Best --Marc
>
> Yes, like double checking papers, before publication, that have foolish
> data in them like:
> "semi-aquatic" mountain beavers.
>
> They live in "areas that contain second growth tree species, shrubs, and
> prefer to be near water",


But not near water to swim and dive in, try to get your facts straight.
They drink water they can dig down to (or get moisture from leaves they
eat), but they do not have to be near a creek, river, lake, or spring.
They are not "semi-aquatic" Your paper is in error.



eat "forbs, grasses, and even ferns such as sword
> fern and bracken fern."


http://wdfw.wa.gov/wlm/living/mtn_beavers.htm


Their enamel microwear resembles that of afarensis.


"When they are feeding in Christmas tree farms"& "bark"
So Afarensis was eating Christmas Trees and bark?


> Savanna IYO?


Then I thought of a better name for your hypothesis: The Aquatic Apith
Hypothesis.


>
> But try to be relevant: this has nothing to do with Homo, of course.

You, who continually throws thirty subjects into a post
430eec1e$0$19635$ba620e4c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
are complaining about relevancy? You need to be in comedy. :-)



>
>
>
>
> > http://tinyurl.com/b9t27
> > "For the past fifteen million years, the East African Rift Valley has
> > been a unique geological environment which contains many enormous
> > freshwater lakes. Paleoanthropological evidence clearly indicates that
> > hominids evolved in East Africa, and that early Homo inhabited the Rift
> > Valley lake shores."
> >
> > Something may have been at the lake shores, but it wasn't Homo
> > swimming.
> >
> > 1) Ah? How do you know? any evidence??
> > 2) Again "forgetting" the comparative evidence??
> >
> > These people have not read the literature Marc, you have been deceived.
> >
> > Dominguez-Rodrigo (2001), Hay (2001), Isaac (1977), Feibel (1993) etc.
> > say no deep water.
> >
> > Feibel's more recent work suggests a connection between the Indian Ocean &
> > Turkana. This is now confirmed by Trauth, M. H. et al. Late Cenozoic
> > Moisture History of East Africa. Science DOI: 10.1126/science.1112964
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Rift Valley lake fish and shellfish provided brain-specific nutrition for
> > early Homo.
> >
> > Broadhurst CL, Cunnane SC, Crawford MA.
> >
> > 22nd Century Nutrition Inc., Cloverly, MD 20905-4007, USA. cleigh@xxxxxxxx
> >
> > An abundant, balanced dietary intake of long-chain polyunsaturated fatty
> > acids is an absolute requirement for sustaining the very rapid expansion
> of
> > the hominid cerebral cortex during the last one to two million years. The
> > brain contains 600 g lipid/kg, with a long-chain polyunsaturated fatty
> acid
> > profile containing approximately equal proportions of arachidonic acid and
> > docosahexaenoic acid. Long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acid deficiency at
> > any stage of fetal and/or infant development can result in irreversible
> > failure to accomplish specific components of brain growth. For the past
> > fifteen million years, the East African Rift Valley has been a unique
> > geological environment which contains many enormous freshwater lakes.
> > Paleoanthropological evidence clearly indicates that hominids evolved in
> > East Africa, and that early Homo inhabited the Rift Valley lake shores.
> > Although earlier hominid species migrated to Eurasia, modern Homo sapiens
> is
> > believed to have originated in Africa between 100 and 200 thousand years
> > ago, and subsequently migrated throughout the world. A shift in the
> hominid
> > resource base towards more high-quality foods occurred approximately two
> > million years ago; this was accompanied by an increase in relative brain
> > size and a shift towards modern patterns of fetal and infant development.
> > There is evidence for both meat and fish scavenging, although
> sophisticated
> > tool industries and organized hunting had not yet developed. The earliest
> > occurrences of modern H. sapiens and sophisticated tool technology are
> > associated with aquatic resource bases. Tropical freshwater fish and
> > shellfish have long-chain polyunsaturated lipid ratios more similar to
> that
> > of the human brain than any other food source known. Consistent
> consumption
> > of lacustrine foods could have provided a means of initiating and
> sustaining
> > cerebral cortex growth without an attendant increase in body mass. A
> modest
> > intake of fish and shellfish (6-12% total dietary energy intake) can
> provide
> > more arachidonic acid and especially more docosahexaenoic acid than most
> > diets contain today. Hence, 'brain-specific' nutrition had and still has
> > significant potential to affect hominid brain evolution.
> >
> >
> > :-)
> >
> > What more must I say??
>
>
> "Paleoanthropological evidence clearly indicates that hominids evolved
> in
> East Africa, and that early Homo inhabited the Rift Valley lake
> shores."

Like the rest of your/their imagination, no evidence.


>
>
> PA evidence shows apiths living in E & S.Africa, Chad etc.


I thought fossils were of no use?


and Homo living
> in E & S & N.Africa & Europe & S & E.Asia.

Near runnels and dry creek beds.



>
> You might say to the authors: "stop poluting the literature with
> foolish nonsense."
>
> Dominguez-Rodrigo (2001), Feibel (1992), Hay (2001), Isaac (1977) etc.
> etc.
>
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > ______
> >
> >
> >
> > > ______
> > >
> > >
> > > eg, fossil remains
> > > > from 3 Early Pleist.localities in lacustrine deposits in the An Nafud
> > > desert
> > > > 27°N NW.Saudi-Arabia .. Fish & turtle are also present, indicating
> > > > perennial open water. .. Early Pleist.Anatolia also appears to have
> > > been
> > > > moister than today .. with both humid & dry seasons . .. Kashafrud
> > Basin
> > > > 36°N in NE.Iran, Oldowan-type stone artefacts were found in the
> > > palaeo-shore
> > > > deposits of a vast shallow Late Plio/Early Pleist.lake ..
> > >
> > > Yes, "vast shallow lake" that fluctuated or dried up often. Show one
> > > site that has been determined to have been on the edge of this lake, or
> > > even demonstrate this lake was even present when tools were deposited.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Dmanisi ..
> > > > abundant local water resources & a fairly open landscape with forests
> > > found
> > > > on river banks & nearby mountain slopes .. only 60 km from the
> Caspian,
> > > > which may then have joined the Black Sea
> > >
> > >
> > > 60 km is considered near? May have been?????
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > .. increasing aridity *after*
> > > > the hominid occupation,
> > >
> > >
> > > More arid AFTER, got that? Early Homo adapted to drier, not wetter
> > > conditions, proving once again no need for an aquatic past.
> > >
> > >
> > > leading to the expansion of steppe grasslands ...
> > > > hominids' colonising abilities were constrained to a particular mix of
> > > > habitats within a small area."
> > >
> > > Of course if your are following savanna animals around, what evidence
> > > is there to suggest otherwise.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Instead of denying the presence of large waters
> > >
> > >
> > > You cite from a paper that was meant to be a generalized overview, not
> > > a site report.
> > > Nowhere in Dennell's paper does he contradict the original work of Hay
> > > (2003), Feibel (1992), Dominguez-Rodrigo (2001), or Isaac (1977) who
> > > have proven no large bodies of water were present when most of the
> > > sites were occupied. Do you think you know the difference between a
> > > historical overview and a site report? You have just confirmed above
> > > that you don't.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > (as proved by our anatomy &
> > > > physiology),
> > >
> > >
> > > Marc (the non-professional), can tell the depth of the lake water 2
> > > Mya by just looking at the length of a person's nose today, yet
> > > professional geologists working in sediments 2 My old cannot tell the
> > > depth of a shallow runnel? You wonder why peer-review journal editors
> > > throw your submitted papers in the wastebasket?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > it would be more productive to try to find out which particular
> > > > mix exactly.
> > >
> > >
> > > They already have, your ignorance of the published literature is hardly
> > > an argument.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Note grasslands (very abundant at the waterside) don't mean
> > > > savanna.
> > >
> > >
> > > Nor does it mean early Homo found in those grasslands were eating
> > > grass, but savanna adpapted animals were.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Marc Verhaegen
> > > >
> > > > http://www.onelist.com/community/AAT
> > > >
> > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AAT1

.

Relevant Pages